Hi, > This also means that most "new features" would wait for the "next > stable" version to be released. If the "next stable" isn't a 3 year > cycle like 2.0->2.2, I believe this could be acceptable. > > I believe that we should have more stable branches, more often. I > believe that we should try to only backport bugfixes and security issues > to these branches, and attempt to avoid adding many new features.
+1. I'm kinda new as an ASF committer, and all this backport stuff surprised me a lot. I keep thinking we are spoiling our efforts on backporting, backporting, again and again. Why can't we just move on ? 2.0 made is time, and everybody is looking forward for the 2.2 release to show up. Only minor fixes and security fixes should be backported. A new version of a piece of code should be kept for the next release. That's why we have releases, after all : to release new, better code :) My 2 cents, too. - Sam -- Maxime Petazzoni (http://www.bulix.org) -- gone crazy, back soon. leave message.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
